Searching Taylor Family Trees in the Taylor Surname Project

Participants in the Surname Project have the opportunity to submit family trees.  In fact, they are strongly encouraged to do so, as well as to send in updated information if they discover changes.  However with almost 400 participants, it was hard to find information across the membership.  Now, with the single link below, you can search for given names, locations, migration patterns... 

I've just spent a pleasant hour searching around looking for a collatoral Taylor line.  Like many of you, I descend from two Taylor lines, and the "other" one I don't have a direct male descendant to test.  So I was looking to see if that line is already in the database.  It appears not to be, but more searching or a different approach may help me find the right line. 

In the meantime I have a couple of Taylor groups that were in the right locations at the right time in US history to be possible contenders.

http://freepages.misc.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~taylorydna/fam-trees/all_trees.shtml

Best wishes for your successful ancestoral search!

Lalia

67-Marker Matches

Hi Again,

I'm continuing with more material from Ralph Taylor on the meaning of matches. What does it mean if you match 67 out of 67, commonly written 67/67, with another person? There is about a 50% likelihood that you share the same great-grandfather! Thus, you are second cousins. You could be slightly closer related or slightly more distantly related, but you are related recently as genealogists measure relationship!

As Ralph Taylor says, "67-marker matches, if you’re lucky enough to find one, are very precise; you may need to account for the birth dates of the matching individuals. The main problem is that most people have done a lesser test, so you can only compare against the markers they had tested." Thus, refer to earlier blogs which discuss 37 marker matches and fewer matches.

Should you match in the range of 65-67/67: You share a common ancestor and he almost certainly lived within a genealogic time frame.

o A perfect 67/67: The 90% probability level is a TMRCA of <= 11 generations, >= 1735 AD; 70% is <= 6 gen., >= 1860 AD; & it’s 50% probable that your common ancestor is your great-great-grandfather.

o 66/67: 90% is <= 18 gen., >= 1560 AD; 70% is <= 18 gen., >= 1730 AD; 50% is <= 7 gen., 1835 AD.

o 65/67: 90% is <= 24 gen., >= 1410 AD; 70% is <= 16 gen., >= 1610; 50% is <= 12 gen., >= 1710 AD.

Should you match in the range of 62-64/67: You share a common ancestor, who may or may not have lived in a genealogic time frame.

o 64/67: 90% is <= 31 gen., >= 1235; 70% is <= 22 gen., >= 1460; 50% is <= 16 gen., 1610.

o 63/67: 90% is <= 37 gen., >= 1085 AD; 70% is <= 27 gen., >= 1330 AD; 50% is <= 21 gen., >= 1480 AD.

o 62/67: 90% is <= 43 gen., >= 930 AD; 70% is <= 32 gen., >= 1200 AD; 50% is <= 26 gen., >= 1360 AD.

We've have spent a number of blog entries discussing the statistical meaning of matches. You do not need to completely understand statistics or probability, though. What you do need to do is to investigate the family trees of anyone who closely matches you. For example, with a "perfect" match of 67/67, you and the other person should be able to find your common ancestor fairly easily. One hopes that each of you has some information about your mutual family tree so that you each gain significant new information. After all, that's why you chose to participate in this project.

The good news is that eventually sufficient y-DNA records and pedigrees will exist to satisfy every participant's desire for knowledge of their roots!

Best wishes as we move towards that goal.

Lalia

37-Marker Matches and What They Mean

Hi,

What happens when you test 37 markers? Does a match of 36 out of 37 markers, commonly abbreviated as 36/37, mean more than 23/24?

Here is some more information from Ralph Taylor on what matches mean when we have 37 loci or markers to consider.

37-marker matches get even more precise. For example, if you share 35, 36 or 37 markers with another Taylor (or someone with your surname, if you are not looking at Taylor project results!) then you share a common ancestor, probably within a genealogic time frame.

o A perfect 37/37: The chances are 90% that your TMRCA is <= 19 generations, >= 1530 AD; 70% prob. is <= 10 gen, >= 1760 AD; 50% is <= 6 gen., >= 1860 AD.

o 36/37: 90% is <= 32 gen., >= 1210 AD; 70% is <= 20 gen., >= 1500 AD; 50% is <= 14 gen., >= 1660 AD.

o 35/37: 90% is <= 45 gen., >= 885 AD; 70% is <= 30 gen., >= 1260 AD; 50% is <= 22 gen., >= 1460 AD.

However when you have 37 markers to compare, and you don't match 35 or more, such as 33-34/37: You share a common ancestor, but probably not within a genealogic time frame.

§ 34/37: 90% is <= 57 gen., >= 580 AD; 70% is <= 40 gen., >= 1000 AD; 50% is <= 31 gen., >= 1235 AD.

§ 33/37: 90% is <= 69 gen., >= 285 AD; 70% is <= 50 gen., >= 760 AD; 50% is <= 40 gen., >= 1010 AD.

When we get to 32 matches out of 37, or worse: You may share a common ancestor, but the probability that he lived in within a genealogic time frame is small. The 50% probability level for a 32/37 match is <= 51 generations, >= 735 AD.

For some of you, these discussions of probability and statistics are dull. However, they are necessary to understand the meaning of genetic genealogy. We will have future posts with specific examples. For now, consider that your surname is Taylor. You have a family tree with some degree of confidence. Your fourth cousin, another male Taylor descended from the same line also tests. Now, if you match 37/37 or 36/37, this suggests that the family tree is correct for both of you. If, however, your match is 32/37 or less, the family tree is not correct for one or both of you. Because two males from the same male line, only separated by 6 generations would not differ to this extent.

May all your genealogical puzzles be solved!

Lalia

DNA and the Genealogical Time Frame

Hi,

We Taylor administrator team members have discussed moving this blog, and I was holding off on posting. But so far, it looks like the blog will remain here! This is a submission from one of the administrators, Ralph Taylor. Ralph has a keen interest in the statistical side to genetic DNA and he has submitted several other pieces which I'll post in the coming days.

Lalia
~~~~~~

Sometimes, Y-DNA matches point to a common ancestor who might have lived thousands of years in the past. Finding a name or other information about this man can be an almost insurmountable task; the range of time exceeds the"genealogical time frame".

While it's fun to imagine our Taylor ancestors fighting alongside King Arthur against the Saxons (or, fighting with the Saxons against Arthur) it's not genealogy unless we can link a line of descent with specific people. The International Society for Genetic Genealogy (ISOGG) defines "Genealogical Time Frame: A time frame within the last 500 up to 1000 years since the adoption of surnames and written family records..." Though extending to the present, the genealogical time frame (GTF) has no definite & universal beginning point. It depends on the practices and record availability of the specific area in which we want to look. But, we can make some general observations. Genealogy, linking individuals into a pedigree, depends on: 1. Surnames, to identify one John from another in the same place and time and suggest kinship; & 2. Written records naming most people in a community.

Surnames: If you've struggled with too many men of the same name in the same time and place, you know how important surnames are to genealogy. Without surnames, it gets even more confusing. The practice of surnames passing from father to children came into common use only as far back as the mid-14th century (about 650 years ago) in England and even more recently in other places. We believe it traces to a 1353 edict on the issue by King Edward III. With few exceptions, the occupationally-based Taylor surname dates from this time. Earlier ancestors would not have had a surname.

The Scandinavian patronymic system -- in which Carl, the son of Peter, was named Carl Peterson & Peter's grandson became Hans Carlson -- persisted into the 19th century. The Germanic practice of men "marrying the farm" and taking the farm's name lasted about as long.

Written records: In Europe, the practice of recording baptisms, marriages & funerals of parishioners began with the slow spread of the Christian Church. Written records were then adopted by secular authorities for other purposes such as taxes, military conscription and worker control. Written records are, of course, dependent on a written language and a minimum level of literacy. Many ancient languages had no written form, so monks & priests wrote in Latin. Even kings, whose first job was warrioring,were often illiterate.

The Bubonic Plague (also mid-14th century) indirectly stimulated record-keeping on previously-ignored ordinary folk. The plague killed two-thirds of Europe's population and the rigid feudal society as well. As serfs - whose masters had died - fled and masters - whose serfs had died -sought replacement workers, unprecedented movements of people & resulting paranoia were created. Suddenly, it was important to write down who was living in your town or county. Previous records (such as the Domesday Book of 1086) named only taxpayers, the aristocracy. Histories named only the major players -- the "stars", not the supporting casts. We are familiar the effects time has on written records. Courthouses burn, churches and archives are bombed, paper molders.

All these and more conspire to make records which once existed no longer available. The more time that has transpired since a record was created, the less likely it still exists.

Conclusion: I believe ISOGG is being generous with its "up to 1000 years", at least so far as Great Britain & Ireland (from which many Taylor families came) are concerned. I'd peg our GTF as beginning about 1350 AD. Genealogy isn't alchemy; we can't turn lead into gold. We can only work with what there is. Most of us have limits on the time, money and effort we can devote to family history; we have to set priorities. A DNA match pointing to a 90% probability of an ancestor who may have lived before 1350 may not be worth making a high research priority.

Welcome to the Taylor DNA Project Blog—Taylor Topics!

In the interests of serving project members and forwarding the educational and informational goals of the project; the project administers have decided to use a blog for communicating with members.

Our goal is to provide you with information that helps you understand your family tree and to connect with relatives and go further backward to previous generations in your family tree.

The blog will feature short pieces of information about DNA testing, Taylor genealogy, famous Taylors and associated topics.

If you have managed to have a breakthrough regarding your Taylor line through using this project, please send the story to Lalia Wilson (LaliaW@aol.com) so that we can share your story with other project members.

We look forward to hearing from you and answering your questions so that everyone’s questions are answered.